Jharkhand High Court
Sakil Akhtar vs The State Of Jharkhand on 17 March, 2021
1 [Cr.M.P. No. 318 of 2021]
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI
----
Cr.M.P. No. 318 of 2021
----
Sakil Akhtar, aged about 36 years, s/o Barik Ansari, resident of Star
Colony, Power Ganj, Ward No.04, PO-Lohardaga, PS-Lohardaga, District-
Lohardaga, Jharkhand ..... Petitioner
-- Versus --
1.The State of Jharkhand
2.Sabra Khatoon aged about 48 years, w/o Shamim Khan, presently
residing at Star Colony, Power Ganj, Ward No.04, PO-Lohardaga, PS-
Lohardaga, District Lohardaga, Jharkhand ...... Respondent
----
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI
---
For the Petitioner :- Mr. Manoj Prasad, Advocate
For the State :- Mrs. Vandana Bharti, APP
----
4/17.03.2021 Heard Mr. Manoj Prasad, the learned counsel for the
petitioner and Mrs. Vandana Bharti, the learned counsel for the State.
2. Pursuant to the order dated 04.03.2021, the girl and the
petitioner are present in the Court. The mother of the girl, who is the
informant is also present in the Court.
3. The present petition has been filed for quashing the FIR
and the entire criminal proceeding pending in against the petitioner in
connection with Lohardaga Mahila P.S. Case No.25/2020 registered under
Sections 366A and 363 of Indian Penal Code.
4. Mr. Prasad, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner
submits that the petitioner and the girl namely Tahrim Rabiya, the wife of
the petitioner are adult and they have solemnized marriage in terms of
the customs under the Mohammadan Law and thereafter they have also
got their marriage registered before the Sub-Registrar, Ranchi. He
submits that a joint compromise petition has been filed contained in
Annexure-4 whereby the parties have compromised the matter and now
they are living happily and the informant has also accepted the marriage.
5. The Court has enquired from the husband namely, Shakil
Akhter and wife namely Tahrim Rabiya about the marriage and they
jointly submitted that they are in wedlock and they are living happily and
their marriage has been accepted by the family. This aspect of the matter
has also been accepted by the informant who happens to be the mother
of the girl. She accepted that now the matter has been compromised and
she also accepted this marriage. On perusal of the Registration
Certificate before the Sub Registrar regarding the marriage, it transpires
that it has been registered on 20.08.2020 before the District Sub
Registrar, Ranchi contained in Annexure-3 and the compromise petition is
at Annexure-4 in which in clear words it has been stated that the dispute
has been settled between the parties without any pre-condition. Article
21 of the Constitution of India says about the right to marry a person of
choice and there is complete freedom to choose life partner of any faith,
belief, religion, caste etc. and neither the State nor law, nor society can
dictate choice of partner. This aspect of the matter has been considered
by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in so many cases, a reference in this
regard may be made in the case of "Laxmibai Chandaragi B. and Another
v. State of Karnataka and Others" , 2021 SCC Online SC 85. Paragraph
no.12 of the said judgment is quoted hereinbelow:
"12. In Shafin Jahan v. Asokan K M, this Court
noticed that the society was emerging through a crucial
transformational period. Intimacies of marriage lie within a
core zone of privacy, which is inviolable and even matters of
faith would have the least effect on them. The right to marry
a person of choice was held to be integral Article 21 of the
Constitution of India. In this behalf, the judgment of the nine
Judges Bench in Justice K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India
may also be referred to where the autonomy of an individual
inter alia in relation to family and marriage were held to be
integral to the dignity of the individual."
6. In view of the above facts and considering that now the
compromise has been reached between the parties and the family has
accepted the marriage, moreover, the petitioner and the victim girl are
major and they are entitled to chose their life partner. This is a fit case to
exercise power under section 482 Cr.PC.
7. Accordingly, the criminal proceeding against the petitioner
in connection with Lohardaga Mahila P.S. Case No.25/2020 registered
under Sections 366A and 363 of Indian Penal Code and the entire
criminal proceeding is hereby quashed.
8. The instant Cr.M.P. stands allowed.
( Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J)
SI/
